Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    Investigating Fiqh Al Akbar

    Uploaded by

    suleimanbelgore5

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Investigating Fiqh Al Akbar

    Uploaded by

    suleimanbelgore5
    1 views5 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    1 views5 pages

    Investigating Fiqh Al Akbar

    Uploaded by

    suleimanbelgore5

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 5

    Investigating Fiqh Al-Akbar

    By Omar N.
    Introduction

    The book attributed to Abū Ḥanīfah has been criticized lately. One can suspect this criticism is

    because of what it is contained in the book. This leads to attempts of trying to weaken the book,

    and discredit it by finding Jarh (criticism) on the narrators of the book. However, this is such a

    weak effort in doing so and this book will be dedicated to refuting the allegations against the

    narrators. We will also show the strength of each narrator of the book, and finally demonstrating

    to the opposers that this book was written by Abū Ḥanīfah.

    The isnād (chain of transmission) begins with Nuṣayr ibn Yaḥyā, to Muḥammad ibn

    Muqātil al-Rāzī, to ʿIṣām ibn Yūsuf, to Ḥammād ibn Abī Ḥanīfah. In format:

    Nuṣayr ibn Yaḥyā > Muḥammad ibn Muqātil al-Rāzī > ʿIṣām ibn Yūsuf > Ḥammād ibn

    Abī Ḥanīfah > Abū Ḥanīfah

    These are the narrators for the book of Fiqh Al-Akbar, all of them are thiqāt (reliable) however,

    some may try to weaken the scholars. Let’s take a look into these allegations against them.

    Nuṣayr ibn Yaḥyā


    Nuṣayr ibn Yaḥyā is the first narrator to begin in the isnād. He died in 268 AH, and met the great

    scholar Ahmed Ibn Hanbal. AMuhammad Hafizur Rahman Al-Kamalai records his tarajim

    (biography) in his book, so claims of him being a majhul (unkown) is false. He was taught by

    Imam Abu Sulayman Musa ibn Sulayman Al-Jawzjani who studied with both Muhammed Ibn

    Al-Hasan and Abu Yusuf. He was the one who taught Al-Maturidi, the one who started the

    theological school the “Maturidi” who some consider Ahlus-Sunnah Wal Jam’ah.
    Muḥammad ibn Muqātil al-Rāzī
    ibn Muqātil, the second narrator in the isnād. He was a student of Muhammed Ibn Al-Hasan

    Ash Shaybani, and was a faqīh. Abu Hatim said he was trustworthy (707 /3) ‫ )ﺗﮭﺬﯾﺐ اﻟﺘﮭﺬﯾﺐ‬this

    ta’dil is also recorded in ‫ﺗﮭﺬﯾﺐ اﻟﻜﻤﺎل‬, and Ibn Hibban said he was a thiqāt (491 /26 ‫ﺗﮭﺬﯾﺐ اﻟﻜﻤﺎل‬.)

    More scholars who declared him reliable was Al-Khalil in ‫ﺗﮭﺬﯾﺐ اﻟﺘﮭﺬﯾﺐ‬. He was part of Ahlul-Ra’yy.

    Those who weakened him were from Ahlul-Hadith, like Al-Bukhari. However, Al-Bukhari isn’t

    credible because it was known at that time the Ahlul Hadith held hatred against Ahlul-Ra’yy,

    that’s why Ibn Adi tried to weakened Hasan Bin Zayd by showing the jārh of other scholars

    against him who he himself graded da’if! Another scholar who had weakened Muqātil was

    Al-Dhahabi, but he said that he was weak in hadith. Being weak in hadith doesn’t affect book

    transmission, only if he was a liar, or fabricator then this would show weakness in Fiqh

    Al-Akbar. But, even if those who said he was a liar, they must give reason for why he is. Like Ibn

    Hajar has said, if the scholars differentiate themselves if a narrator is reliable or not, they must

    give a reason for their criticism . In this case, no good reason was established on how he was a

    liar by Al-Bukhari.

    ʿIṣām ibn Yūsuf


    ʿIṣām ibn Yūsuf was one of the students and companions of Abu Yusuf, and was regarded as a

    thiqāt to Ibn Hibban. He died in the year of 220 AH, criticism regarding him was mainly done

    Ahlul-Hadith. For example, Ibn Sa’id weakened him. However, we have already established the

    great hatred Ahlul Hadith had for Ahlu Ra’yy, but not only that but Ibm Sa’id only weakened

    him on hadith so this cannot weaken his reliability on transmitting Fiqh Al-Akbar. Moreover,
    Al-Khalīl has stated that he was truthful. All of this is recorded from Lisan Al-Mizani by Ibn

    Hajar al-Asqalani.

    Ḥammād ibn Abī Ḥanīfah


    Ḥammād ibn Abī Ḥanīfah, the son of Abū Ḥanīfah, he followed the madhab of his father. He died

    in 176 AH in Iraq. He was weakened by Ibn Adī, as Hasan Bin Zayd who was in the same class as

    Ḥammād. However, Al-Dhahabi responded to this allegation, he wrote “Ibn ʿAdī mentioned him

    with some weakness, stating that he did not remain unblemished in the eyes of Ibn ʿAdī’s strict

    standards. However, it should be noted that his father (Abū Ḥanīfa) is considered one of the

    greatest scholars of his time, and many scholars highly respect him due to his knowledge and his

    significant contributions to fiqh. They consider him an undisputed authority in Islamic

    scholarship. Criticisms about him or his companions are usually attributed to adversaries of Abū

    Ḥanīfa and his companions, and should not be taken at face value.” This is in his book Al-Mizān.

    He was regarded thiqāt by Al-Khaṭīb, where he wrote, “Ḥammād was a virtuous man of

    significant standing in terms of piety and righteousness.” By this we can conclude that Ḥammād

    isn’t da’if (weak) and is a reliable narrator.

    Conclusion
    In conclusion, we can proudly say that Fiqh Al-Akbar is an authentic book. Each narrator is a

    thiqāt and has tarajim (biography). Those who weaken them are usually Ahlul-Hadith, but were

    known for hating Ahlul-Ra’yy. With responding to the allegations against these narrators, the

    book is authentically attributed to Abū Ḥanīfah.

    You might also like